Legal Research AI

McCann v. Bryon L. Rosquist, D.C., P.C.

Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Date filed: 1999-08-03
Citations: 185 F.3d 1113
Copy Citations
9 Citing Cases
Combined Opinion
                                                                         F I L E D
                                                                   United States Court of Appeals
                                                                           Tenth Circuit

                                                                          JUN 19 2001
                      UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                                                     PATRICK FISHER
                                                                               Clerk
                                     TENTH CIRCUIT



 MELANIE MCCANN, NOELE
 NELSON, LISA NIELSON,

          Plaintiffs - Appellants,
 v.
                                                       No. 98-4049
 BRYON L. ROSQUIST, D.C., P.C., a
 Utah corporation; BRYON L.
 ROSQUIST, individually,

          Defendants - Appellees.


                               OPINION ON REMAND


                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                              for the District of Utah
                              (D.C. No. 97-CV-535-S)


Larry S. Jenkins (Mary Anne Q. Wood, with him on the briefs), Wood Crapo
LLC, Salt Lake City, Utah, for the Plaintiffs - Appellants.

Brent O. Hatch, Johnson & Hatch, P.C., Salt Lake City, Utah, for the
Defendants - Appellees.


Before LUCERO and PORFILIO, Circuit Judges, and COOK *, District Judge.




      The Honorable H. Dale Cook, United States Senior District Judge for the
      *

Northern District of Oklahoma, sitting by designation.
LUCERO, Circuit Judge.



       In United States v. Morrison , 120 S. Ct. 1740, 1759 (2000), the Supreme

Court invalidated the Civil Rights Remedies for Gender-Motivated Violence Act,

42 U.S.C. § 13981, the civil liability provision of the Violence Against Women

Act of 1994. The Court subsequently granted certiorari and vacated and

remanded this case for further consideration in light of   Morrison . Following

Morrison , we must affirm the district court’s dismissal of the instant action based

on the Supreme Court’s invalidation of the underlying statute. The judgment of

the district court is therefore   AFFIRMED .

       The mandate shall issue forthwith.




                                           -2-